Thursday, September 30, 2004

Debate Reaction - What exactly is the 'Global Test'?

I thought Kerry did as good a job as his constantly shifting positions would allow. His 'tan', newly whitened teeth and manicure all looked good. And Bush refrained from calling him a "wrinkle-tard" (ref: Conan O'Brien).

InstaPress reaction will be that Kerry edged Bush. But I think the Bush strategy was much craftier than that of the Kerry camp. Kerry was speaking to the mainstream press, trying to cement his positions after making so many, divergent statements. At that, he did reasonably well. But his content was vastly inferior to that of the president.

In contrast, President Bush was speaking to the people, hammering home the point that Kerry is an equivocator and that in this, the nuclear age of terrorism, equivocation equals catastrophe.

The reaction will come two, three, four days out as the messages are digested. People will remember three things about the debate: Kerry's ultra-bright teeth, Kerry's comment regarding pre-emptive attack... provided it passed the 'global test' (big mistake), and Kerry's return to a nuclear freeze (another monumental error).

The 'global test' will not pass the 'smell test' for most Americans. Nor will unilaterally stopping development of weapons system. So... Kerry goes full circle, returning to his anti-Reagan roots instinctually, promising to unilaterally stop development of necessary weapons system.

John Kerry... I don't like you, because you're gonna get me killed.

Jonah Goldberg: "WHY Does Kerry keep saying we didn't secure Saddam's nuclear facilities if he thinks he didn't have any?"

InstaPundit: Bush is hitting Kerry on North Korea, contrasting the Clintonian bilateral strategy with his own multilateral strategy -- see, he can bring in allies! "Now there are 5 voices speaking to Kim Jong-Il." Kerry straddles in response to a Lehrer followup: I want both bilateral and multilateral talks!

Hugh Hewitt: Biggest mistake by Kerry: "The Global Test." The FoxNews panel agrees: "Global Test" is the takeaway. On substance, Kerry wants appeasement of North Korea and Iran, gloablization of conflict resolution, and a summit. Bush wants to take the war to the terrorists. Kerry wants meetings... tomorrow and for 30+ days I'll be playing the 'global test' clip, because it was the window into Kerry's soul, and Bush immediately rejected it because Bush wants nothing of it. As I wrote below: Game, set, match.

DJ Drummond: Now I know Kerry does not respect the voters, he actually denied ever wavering or being equivocal. He brought up domestic issues again. FUMBLE??? Did Kerry just say he would STOP US development of Nuclear Weapons UNILATERALLY, in order to stop proliferation?

Kerry tied in Knots by Diane Sawyer

How hard can it be to tie John Kerry in knots over Iraq if even Diane Sawyer can do it? Consider this exchange, as reproduced by PoliPundit:

DIANE SAWYER: Was the war in Iraq worth it?

JOHN KERRY: We should not have gone to war knowing the information that we know today.

DS: So it was not worth it.

JK: We should not - it depends on the outcome ultimately - and that depends on the leadership. And we need better leadership to get the job done successfully, but I would not have gone to war knowing that there was no imminent threat - there were no weapons of mass destruction - there was no connection of Al Qaeda - to Saddam Hussein! The president misled the American people - plain and simple. Bottom line.

DS: So if it turns out okay, it was worth it?

JK: No.

DS: But right now it wasn’t [ … ? … ]-

JK: It was a mistake to do what he did, but we have to succeed now that we’ve done what he’s - I mean look - we have to succeed. But was it worth - as you asked the question - $200 billion and taking the focus off of Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda? That’s the question. The test of the presidency was whether or not you should have gone to war to get rid of him. I think, had the inspectors continued, had we done other things - there were plenty of ways to keep the pressure on Saddam Hussein.

DS: But no way to get rid of him.

JK: Oh, sure there were. Oh, yes there were. Absolutely.

DS: So you’re saying that today, even if Saddam Hussein were in power today it would be a better thing - you would prefer that . . .

JK: No, I would not prefer that. And Diane - don’t twist here.

There's little need to analyze this exchange-- the real story is Kerry's inability, after all this time, to sound coherent on Iraq, and his testiness when a relatively friendly journalist asks for straight answers. But there is another story. Kerry is now claiming that there "absolutely" were ways to "get rid" of Saddam without the U.S. going to war with him. And it is through this claim, apparently, that Kerry intends to argue that it was not worth it to go war, while avoiding a concession that he prefers having Saddam in power to the present situation.

Sawyer did not ask Kerry how we could have toppled Saddam without taking him on militarily (why should she have; she was already trouncing him?). If she had asked, Kerry might have responded that eventually the U.S. could have taken him on with a broader coalition, as if (a) France would ever have joined us and (b) having a few Frenchmen on the ground would make the present situation materially different. In any event should Kerry's statement to Sawyer become his latest position on Iraq, he might as well throw in the towel. In the current environment, I can't conceive of Americans electing a president that prone to ducking hard choices through wishful, if not delusional, thinking.

Tina Brown gets Antsy

Captain's Quarters reports that Tina Brown is getting antsy...

Former magazine publisher Tina Brown writes in her Washington Post column today that Democrats have tired of hearing what a great closer John Kerry is, and wants the closing to start now rather than later:

With all the mythology about Kerry's gift of coming from behind, New Yorkers are watching and hoping like fundamentalists awaiting the rapture. "What will it be like?" they ask one another. A mysterious subtle transformation of will that suffuses Kerry with winner's luck? A defining moment when he soothes his wounded honor with a shaft of killing wit that at last unmasks Bush? If so, could it please happen in prime time tonight? (Maybe, just in case, Kerry should wear cowboy boots to reduce the president still further to the size of Dr. Ruth.)

Among the big-donor crowd, the good-closer cliche has worn out its welcome. They have had it with reading in the New York Times that the past two months of flubs were part of some weird subliminal strategy. Who does Kerry think he is? Bob Dylan? Enough already with the near-death experiences. Mr. Closer, give us closure.

I've thought about this reputation Kerry has garnered as some fourth-quarter genius who outlasts his opponents and scores a last-minute victory, but I'm not buying it, and it looks like Brown isn't either. He's won four terms in the Senate and a term as lieutenant governor in highly liberal Massachusetts as Ted Kennedy's protege. Really, how difficult is that to do? The wonder is that he had to come from behind at all, even against William Weld.

Wednesday, September 29, 2004

Hamas in America

Is this the same Hamas that was funded by Saddam Hussein? Uhmm... that would be 'yes'.

On August 20, two suspected high-level Hamas operatives, Mohammed Salah and Abdelhaleem Ashqar, were detained on American soil and charged with providing material support to Hamas, racketeering, and money laundering.

That same day, accused Hamas money man Ismail Elbarasse was arrested after authorities witnessed his wife videotaping Maryland's Chesapeake Bay Bridge from their SUV as Mr. Elbarasse drove. The images captured by Mr. Elbarasse's wife included close-ups of cables and other features "integral to the structural integrity of the bridge," according to court papers.

Given that Mr. Elbarasse was recently announced as an unindicted co-conspirator in a scheme to finance Hamas terrorist attacks against Israel, you'd think the Bay Bridge incident would raise serious alarms.

I just received a letter from Terry McCauliffe!

Okay, it was a mass emailing based upon a signup I did many months ago. Here's the text of the email with my comments in bold.

Our mission right now -- yours and mine -- is to make sure John Kerry, John Edwards, and all our Democratic candidates have the support they need to win on November 2. That's why we need you to flood Democratic Party headquarters with a history-making outpouring of financial support between now and our critical September 30th deadline... What, did George Soros pull the plug on this disastrous mess? Why should I contribute when you've got a billionaire on the hook?

Are you sick of seeing the Republicans tell bold-faced lies about John Kerry's military record? You mean like 'Christmas in Cambodia'? The CIA man and the magic hat? Or the rice-bin purple heart? Or the rejected first purple heart application that somehow magically got sent in and approved weeks later? Could you elaborate on which of those are lies, just for my own edification?

Are you angry at Cheney, Hastert, and all the rest who keep implying that voting for Kerry leaves America more open to terrorist attacks? Well, don't take their word for it. You can ask the (link) Mullahs, Ayatollahs, terrorists, rogue nations, and other radicals... they're happily endorsing John Kerry. Why would they, unless they could further their agenda? Or have they been frightened into submission by the 'great equivocator'?

Have you had it up to here with Bush turning a blind eye to the reality in Iraq? What, that we've collected a bunch of terrorists in one place so we can kill them more easily, rather than having them scattered to the four winds planning attacks in Peoria?

Does your blood boil when you see Bush and his administration ignore the hardship caused by the jobs they've lost and the health care crisis they haven't lifted a finger to solve? No, my blood boils when partisan stooges casually ignore events like 9/11, which were the result of repeatedly failed Clintonian policies, and which destroyed a million jobs in a matter of weeks. Or ignore the true health-care crisis: frivolous lawsuits against the medical community by unethical trial lawyers.

Well this is it. It's our moment to give John Kerry, John Edwards, and all our Democratic candidates the all-out, no-holds-barred support they need to drive on to victory. Yes, this is it. My wife has some more Instant Tanning lotion your candidates can use. Will that help towards a victory?

Let the Republicans know that we're not going to take it anymore. Contribute by our urgent September 30 fundraising deadline...Do you know of I way I can donate lotion online?

...Have you heard all the talk about how "relentless" our Republican opponents are? Well, they don't know the meaning of the word. We'll show them what happens when a slew of right-thinking Democrats fight back. 'Right' thinking? No, no, no, not a faux pas in a fundraising letter! Oh Jeez, what will Colmes think!

And don't forget to join Paul Begala and James Carville on September 30th at 8 p.m. ET as they host the National Debate Watch House Party conference call. They'll tell you how to push back against Karl Rove's spin and how you can help win the debate for John Kerry. It all comes down to you and what you do to help John Kerry... Can't you just see Carville and Begala high-fiving each other in the backroom, watching a day-glo Orange Kerry... 'John, this Instatan lotion will really help! You look a little wan, take the whole bottle... scuze me, I've gotta make a phone call... [dials Hillary while walking away]... [whispering]... Hill, looks like we got this thing wrapped up. He looks like the Tropicana Logo... talk to ya...'

Let's tell them to get out of our way. October's almost here and we've come to take our country back. Act now to make these last three days of September a turning point in this campaign. Send the biggest donation you've ever sent -- and send it right now. Will do, my 64 oz. bottle of lotion is on the way!

Links o' the Day

Tuesday, September 28, 2004

Arrests made in Plutonium Black Market

Authorities in Kyrgyzstan say they have arrested two men who were trying to sell a large quantity of plutonium on the black market. The men were detained last week near the capital, Bishkek, but the news was not immediately released...

The national security service in the remote mountainous republic says it arrested two Kyrgyz citizens and confiscated 60 small containers containing plutonium-239. There is no information on exactly what quantity of plutonium was in the containers. Kyrgyz security agents tracked the men who were attempting to sell the plutonium and arrested them while posing as buyers.

The origin of the material is unknown.

Security officials say it is not used in Kyrgyzstan, so they think it may have come from one of the neighbouring republics or from Russia...

O'Reilly: the Bush Interview

President Bush's interview with Bill O'Reilly tonight was a great exchange. O'Reilly asked pointed questions -- tough questions. The president answered them with confidence and conviction.

This contrasts with Kerry who has not sat for an extended interview, or even a short interview, on camera with a journalist since August 1. Kerry cannot do so because he cannot answerer the questions without colliding with himself. So its Letterman, Dr. Phil and Jon Stewart. Some Commander-in-Chief, who won't even risk a meeting with Bill O'Reilly.

"[Kerry's] habit of soliciting one more point of view prompted one close adviser to say he had learned to wait until the last minute before weighing in: Mr. Kerry, he said, is apt to be most influenced by the last person who has his ear. His aides rejoiced earlier this year when Mr. Kerry yielded his cell phone to an aide, a move they hoped would limit his seeking out contrary opinions." --Sunday's New York Times on John Kerry.

The last person to talk to Kerry will usually be Theresa or Teddy Kennedy. Really. So be sure to read what Teddy had to say at George Washington University yesterday. Kerry's collapse must be across the board to allow the aging lion of the incoherent left to come out and growl. Kennedy is Kerry's mentor. Kennedy will be the decisive voice on foreign affairs. America is fully warned as to what that means by reading through the remarks Kennedy gave yesterday.

Kennedy says Bush makes U.S. more vulnerable to nuclear attack

From, you guessed it, the AP:

The Bush administration's failure to shut down al-Qaida and rebuild Iraq have fueled the insurgency and made the United States more vulnerable to a nuclear attack by terrorists, Sen. Edward M. Kennedy said Sunday.

In a speech prepared for delivery at George Washington University on Monday, Kennedy said that by shifting attention from Osama bin Laden to Iraq, Bush has increased the danger of a ''nuclear 9/11.''

''The war in Iraq has made the mushroom cloud more likely, not less likely,'' he said in the remarks released late Sunday...

...Kennedy's Monday speech details 13 reasons why Bush's policies have not made the United States safer from terrorism. Among other things, he said the war in Iraq created a new breeding ground for terrorists, distracted from efforts to eliminate al-Qaida, alienated America's allies and allowed North Korea and Iran to pursue nuclear weapons.

Suprisingly, Kennedy made no mention of Madeline Albright's brilliant 1994 negotation techniques with the North Koreans or Jimmy Carter's failure to support the Shah of Iran, which resulted in the current Iranian government.

The Narcissist

It isn’t hard to see, or hear. All one has to do is listen to John Kerry for a bit. His every word drips of it. It emanates from his every action. John Kerry is arrogant. This has never been more obvious than in his recent remarks about Iraq in the face of Iraqi Prime Minister Ayad Allawi’s speech to a joint session of Congress. John Kerry essentially said that the prime minister didn’t know what he was talking about and that he, John Kerry, did.

We’ve heard about Kerry’s legendary elitism. We’ve heard the stories of him bucking lines in small town Massachusetts, chastising those he usurped with a flippant, ''Don’t you know who I am?'' We’ve read accounts of him demeaning Secret Service agents for his lack of balance on his snowboard: ''I don’t fall down. That son-of-a-bitch knocked me over.'' It’s clear that he believes he is above the Everyman. Better than the Everyman. Superior to the Everyman. He is an elitist. He is a narcissist.

All of this pales in comparison to the statements he made directly after the speech to Congress by Prime Minister Allawi...

Halliburton... Fannie Mae

It was John Kerry’s very own idea recently to begin popping the Bush-Cheney team over Halliburton, lifting a theme from the playbook of Howard Dean. Fate has now handed the Bush campaign a rejoinder: Fannie Mae.

Beneficiaries of alleged book-cooking by the federally-sponsored housing colossus include: Jim Johnson, who ran Mr. Kerry’s vice presidential search process and is a former Fannie CEO; Jamie Gorelick, former Clinton Justice Department official and partisan member of the 9/11 commission who formerly served as Fannie’s Vice Chairman; and, most of all Franklin Raines, former Clinton budget director and the politically oleaginous current Fannie CEO who has been touted in recent months as a Kerry Treasury Secretary...

Monday, September 27, 2004

Allawi KO's Kerry

Thank you, Prime Minister, for thanking us and giving us an eye-witnessed, favorable report. We sure aren’t getting either gratitude or an unbiased picture from CBS, NBC or ABC.

These three nutworks, TV’s Axis of Drivel, run negative reports on Abu Ghraib prison cruelty, on American soldiers’ death tolls, on terrorist beheadings of relief workers and on the insurgents in just three of Iraq’s 18 provinces...

Think about it, skeptics: Iraq will have free elections for the first time in its history. For more than 80 years there was been no such thing as a free vote... For nearly 30 years Saddam was the only person on the ballot … and you voted, if you valued your life. The last time he “ran” for President, a couple of years ago, Saddam received 99.6% of the vote...

...During his reign of terror if you spoke out against Saddam, you could count on being sodomized, having your tongue cut off or watching your teenaged daughter gang raped by Udai and Qusai … or perhaps a combination of the above. Now, that’s not a problem, with Saddam festering in jail and his boys roasting in hell.

It was refreshing to get Allawi’s take on the insurgencies in Iraq. He views the terrorists’ flurry of activity not as a sign of strength, but of desperation. They are upping their attacks in a few provinces to derail the coming elections in the US and later in Iraq … kind of like John Kerry trying anything and everything as he tries to salvage his shipwrecked campaign...

Battling for Iraq

General David H. Petraeus weighs in on progress in Iraq:

Helping organize, train and equip nearly a quarter-million of Iraq's security forces is a daunting task. Doing so in the middle of a tough insurgency increases the challenge enormously, making the mission akin to repairing an aircraft while in flight -- and while being shot at. Now, however, 18 months after entering Iraq, I see tangible progress. Iraqi security elements are being rebuilt from the ground up.

The institutions that oversee them are being reestablished from the top down. And Iraqi leaders are stepping forward, leading their country and their security forces courageously in the face of an enemy that has shown a willingness to do anything to disrupt the establishment of the new Iraq...

...there are reasons for optimism. Today approximately 164,000 Iraqi police and soldiers (of which about 100,000 are trained and equipped) and an additional 74,000 facility protection forces are performing a wide variety of security missions. Equipment is being delivered. Training is on track and increasing in capacity. Infrastructure is being repaired. Command and control structures and institutions are being reestablished... Most important, Iraqi security forces are in the fight...

With strong Iraqi leaders out front and with continued coalition -- and now NATO -- support, this trend will continue. It will not be easy, but few worthwhile things are.

New York Times on Kerry's Leadership Habits

Even the Times is coming down hard on Kerry's tendency to dither, relying upon heavy analysis before decisions are actually made. And the last person to have his ear may, in fact, influence the outcome. Makes you wonder what Theresa Heinz-Kerry's agenda may be...

...Kerry is a meticulous, deliberative decision maker, always demanding more information, calling around for advice, reading another document - acting, in short, as if he were still the Massachusetts prosecutor boning up for a case...

...the downside to his deliberative executive style, [his staff] said, is a campaign that has often moved slowly against a swift opponent, and a candidate who has struggled to synthesize the information he sweeps up into a clear, concise case against Mr. Bush.

Even his aides concede that Mr. Kerry can be slow in taking action, bogged down in the very details he is so intent on collecting, as suggested by the fact that he never even used the Medicare information he sent his staff chasing...

...His habit of soliciting one more point of view prompted one close adviser to say he had learned to wait until the last minute before weighing in: Mr. Kerry, he said, is apt to be most influenced by the last person who has his ear...

Former Prime Minister of Spain: Terror Attacks on the Way

Important predictions from someone who's been there.

Former Prime Minister of Spain, Jose Maria Aznar, spoke at breakfast Friday morning at AEI and predicted three spectacular terrorist events in the near future. First, a major destructive action in the United States before election day on November 2, possibly during the last 72 hours, for massive effect in causing confusion and commotion. Second, a dramatic escalation of action in Iraq leading up to November 2, and again in late December and early January to head off the Iraqi election at the end of January. Third, a spectacular attack in the United Kingdom next May to disrupt the re-election campaign of PM Tony Blair.

Aznar's main subject was the serious gap between European elites (and even European popular opinion) and the United States. This gap originated before Bush and it will continue for many years to come. But Americans need seriously to reach out to Europeans, assisting and encouraging our friends (not only fair-weather friends, but friends in difficult times), and making clear to others that gratuitous obstructionism toward the United States is not cost-free.

Mark Hatfield Endorses President Bush

Kerry's band of brothers brought to mind his fellow liberal-pacificsts in the Senate, such as Mark Hatfield of Oregon who boasts: "I was the only senator who voted against both the Democrat and Republican resolutions authorizing the use of force in the 1991 Gulf War. In my final years in the Senate, I opposed President Clinton's decision to send American troops to Bosnia. During my 30 years in the Senate, I never once voted in favor of a military appropriations bill."

"My support is based on the fact that our world changed on Sept. 11, 2001, a day on which we lost more American lives than we did in the attack on Pearl Harbor. I know from my service in the Senate that Saddam Hussein was an active supporter of terrorism. He used weapons of mass destruction on innocent people and left no doubt that he would do so again. It was crucial to the cause of world peace that he be removed from power. Having seen atrocious loss in World War II, I understand the devastation of armed conflict. We have paid dearly with American and Iraqi lives for our commitment, but we cannot afford the alternative. Nor can we afford a president who puts a wet finger in the air and turns over his decisions to pollsters."

How Barney Frank Helped the 9/11 Hijackers

I have just finished reading the 500-page ''9/11 Commission Report,'' and what becomes quite apparent is that the weakest link in our antiterrorism defense system prior to 9/11 was the Immigration and Naturalization Service...

...It was so weak that it became a revolving door for al Qaeda sleeper terrorists who were issued visas that permitted them to come and go as they pleased. And the one man responsible for creating this revolving door was Congressman Barney Frank of Massachusetts, whose 1989 Frank Amendment to INS procedures paved the way for the 19 hijackers to freely enter this country, take flying lessons, and quietly prepare for their deadly attack with no notice from our intelligence agencies...

...Thanks to Barney Frank, there was no way that the U.S. government could keep these sleeper members of al Qaeda out. Nor could they be tracked after arrival. They came with a lot of money, rented cars and apartments, took flying lessons, worked out at gyms, and took transcontinental flights to familiarize themselves with the interiors of the planes they would be hijacking and the routines of the pilots and cabin attendants.

What's John Kerry been doing for the last 20 years?

During Candidate John Kerry’s quest for the Presidency he has brought up many topics. He’s told us about his service in Vietnam. He tells us he can do a better job against Terrorism and that he has a plan to recruit reluctant allies to help out in Iraq.

What we have not heard enough of is Senator Kerry tell us what he has been doing for the past 20 years. John Kerry was elected to the United States Senate in 1984. He sat on the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence between 1993 and 2000.

John Kerry has had 20 years to make a difference as a Washington insider, yet he spends little time on the campaign trail discussing what he’s done for two decades. Instead he chooses to focus on his record in Vietnam and regularly attacks the current administration without offering specific solutions of his own.

Why won't John Kerry talk more about his Senate record as proof of his qualifications?

His voting record in the Senate and public statements contradict his current positions on Iraq, Terrorism, and the Economy, the three most important topics to voters...

Lokisfur: If a man with a gun is pointing it at a cop and he refuses to drop the gun after oh say 14 UN resolutions... and the cop shoots him... and then the cop finds out that the gun was not loaded... does that mean the cop was a liar about the threat. Of course not.

I've got you my pretty!

Sunday, September 26, 2004

Iraq, Iran and WMD's

In the final report from the Iraq Survey Group, a team of weapons inspectors in Iraq determined that Saddam Hussein had no WMD stockpiles at the time of the US invasion, but that Iraq had plans in place to produce them as soon as economic and military sanctions were lifted.

So what exactly are John Kerry's accomplishments? I couldn't easily find a list on the web, for reasons that will become readily apparent, so I checked his official Senate web site. What I found was a tad... uhmmm... frightening.

Over his entire Senate career spanning two decades, John Kerry lists 25 major accomplishments. No signature legislation. No major bills sponsored or co-sponsored. Apparently, though, he did miss a lot of Intelligence meetings. Nonetheless, here are some of the highlights of John Kerry's career, according to his own Senate web site:

A tad frightening, no? A Brockton, Massachusetts Little League award is one of his 25 signature accomplishments in a 20 year Senate career? These are the finest accomplishments of a man who would be president? The hair is standing up on the back of my neck.

An Email Conversation - continued

Here's the email conversation from yesterday, continued.

> I appreciate your effort to provide an academic feel to your rhetoric
> through citations. That might be another difference between us. I don't
> care to spend my time creating citations that I can provide for each of
> my points. These are opinions; not facts. In fact, I think you'd be
> hard pressed to separarate the facts from the fiction in these
> discussions. Too much rhetoric and too little truth....it's an amazing
> time to be alive.

While it is easy to smear the citations themselves as rhetoric, they are not. Did party A meet with party B? Did party C cast a vote against legislation D? I'm guessing that close to 100% of my citations point to facts. Now, ascertaining what those facts mean -- I would agree -- are subjective. But the citations themselves are, almost entirely, related to fact... while their interpretation consists of opinion. But at least my opinions are built upon fact. I would ask you to point to _any_ of my citations that is, of itself, rhetoric or opinion.

> I don't have the sense of paranoia, panic, etc that you appear to have
> because I don't think that we're in the ultimate struggle for the
> survival of western civilization...

This is obviously my opinion, but I completely disagree. For all of human history, marshalling the forces necessary to destroy a city required raising an army, feeding it, supplying it, transporting it, and providing for its logistics. Only then could a city be leveled and its residents killed, dispersed or sold into slavery. History is replete with examples of wanton barbarism of this type, from the Mongol hordes to present day Darfur.

Today, leveling a city requires only acquiring, positioning, and detonating a suitcase-sized package. Further, the primary actors are no longer nation-states that fear massive reprisals (the Mutual Assured Destruction doctrine of the Cold War). Instead we must now deal with suicidal extremists who believe that their ascent into heaven will be accelerated by killing infidels.

Contention #1: At the intersection of these two trends -- availability of highly portable, massively destructive war machines and suicidal religious extremists -- lies a not insignificant probability of a worst-case scenario as described in the book _EndGame_.

Contention #2: If NYC and DC were vaporized tomorrow, our economic and governmental infrastructures would be devastated. Medicare, Social Security, welfare, and untold other Federal systems would stop printing checks. Brokerage accounts would be, at a minimum inaccessible for weeks, if not months. Tens of millions of jobs would instantly disappear. The best case scenario in this eventuality would be a depression. End of civilization? I don't know, but it's close enough for my tastes.

Now, which of these contentions is invalid? Subject matter experts who are paid to simulate and hypothesize on topics such as these are rightfully concerned. So am I.

> If I thought the struggle was that critical I'd not be talking about
> it; I'd be doing something about it.

And some of us are.

> These are opinions, as are yours,
> no matter how many cites you care to give me. I can find a source for
> any opinion I care to take. That's one of the interesting things about
> this election.

Again, please point to a single citation of opinion and not fact.

> 1) We are not at war in the traditional sense. Yes we were when we
> invaded Afghanistan and Iraq. We aren't in the "war on terror"TM. Iraq
> was done without a plan, based upon false information, for the wrong
> reasons, and at the very least at the wrong time.

Now we've got some rhetoric! I let the results (and the facts) speak for themselves. Since the hostilities began:

- The AQ Kahn Nuclear Parts Network, possibly the most ominous threat to world peace on the planet, has been destroyed. Part of the war on terror? I think so.
- Libya has re-entered the world community and shed its WMD aspirations. Part of the war on terror? I think so.
- Afghanistan, formerly home to one of the most brutal regimes (the Taliban) in modern history, is poised to hold national elections next month - Iraq, formerly a home to Abu Abbas, Abu Nidal, a Boeing 707 used to train hijackers, Al Qaeda affiliate Ansar al Islam, and which funded Hamas, Hezbollah and other terrorist groups is now poised to become a secular Democracy. Despite the bleak picture you see from the MSM in select cities, 15 of 18 provinces could hold elections tomorrow (ref: Allawi). And that accounts for 75% of the population. Need proof? Check the ever-increasing Iraq Blog Count. More and more Iraqis are blogging, not fighting.

These are facts. Not rhetoric.

> 2) Yes, there is a struggle and yes it's important, but casting it in
> the light of "war" is the wrong way to view it. We won't win treating
> it like "war". Nor would we win if we treat it like a criminal/police
> event either. We need a new way to look at it. It certainly isn't a
> threat to western civilization as we know it.

The enemy is treating it like a war. And my two contentions above, which I personally believe are true, indicate that -- indeed -- this war is a threat to our basic way of life.

> This needs to be addressed with a long view as I've stated numerous
> times in our discussions. It requires that we change the way we live
> (true energy independence) which is a lot more difficult than sending
> our troops abroad to die without a plan to win the peace (or the
> long-term struggle).

That's all fine, you're saying 'we need to fix the system'. Agreed. But to fix the system, you must have a system to fix. There won't be a system to fix if NYC and DC go up in mushroom clouds. Or it won't be a system we recognize. Perhaps you don't mind that scenario. I do.

> 3) Both candidates from the major parties involved in this coming
> election are pathetic. Bush has shown his inability to unite, lead and
> bring effective change during his four years. His cabinet is rife with
> cronyism and they have skewed views on what this country should be going
> forward.

I don't dispute that both candidates are sub-optimal. But skewering folks like Colin Powell and Condi Rice, who seem to me to be both honorable, ethical and intelligent, does nobody any good.

> Kerry is a lame offering that is an embarrasment. I cut him more
> slack than you because I understand that when he is attacked it's only
> half of the story. This is particularly true with respect to his voting
> record.

Yes, Kerry is an embarrassment. Joe Lieberman? Sure, I could get behind him. And, yes, John Kerry's voting record is egregious. Watch for a later post regarding his accomplishments. There's nothing to dissect in his record because, according to his own Senate web site, three of the 25 most important accomplishments of his career are:

- Gerry Studds Stewardship Award from the Boston Harbor Island Alliance for his work to preserve the Boston Harbor Islands
- Friends of the Public Garden's "Henry Lee Award" for efforts to preserve Boston's green spaces
- Brockton Little League's "Appreciation Award" for work with special needs division

The man is an empty suit and there is no positive half to his Senate record. In fact, I promise to highlight on my blog any keystone legislation he sponsored, any single act that made a difference to the United States.

> 4) There is a lot of noise and very little truth out there. If you go
> in with bias (and I have mine...see #1, #2, & #3) you can find a source
> that will support you. You can always discount the information you get
> that doesn't match your view so that you can avoid the discomfort of
> having to change said view (and perhaps your behavior). Sure, I can
> cite links that support my view. However, most of those links would be
> opinions which you would discount because they can always be said to
> come from the liberal media. And we know they are out to get us and
> turn the country to communism.

I return to my citations. Please find a citation that does not refer to a fact and instead references an opinion or judgment. And speaking of the media, a peer-reviewed academic study entitled A Measure of Media Bias indicates that the MSM truly does have a liberal agenda. CBS's egregious forgery topped off a string of four consecutive 'hit pieces' on President Bush, while the Swiftboat Veterans -- all 250+ of them -- have yet to be heard from on CBS.

And a quick sidetrack on that topic: so far, it's been Kerry who has backtracked on the areas in dispute, not the SwiftVets. Christmas in Cambodia? The CIA man with the magic hat? The rice-bin purple heart? Kerry refusing to sign a Form 180 and release his medical records? That should have been a huge story and, if it hadn't been for the blogosphere, FoxNews and a ton of grassroots support, you'd have never heard it. Instead we get forgeries, apparent collusion with the Democratic National Committee, and ignored witnesses... all intended to influence a presidential election... but I guess there's no news story there.

> Look, we're all citizens of this great country and I'm of the belief
> that we all love our country. There are very few of us that want us to
> be socialized or "communized" and certainly less that want us
> terrorized. However, we're more than happy to speak of our countrymen
> (including Bush and Kerry) as if they are traitors. Both sides use
> this rhetoric and can support it with "citations". I think it's all
> useless bullshit that excites the emotions without accomplishing
> anything other than to support the existing oligarchy.

It sounds like we're both on the same page with respect to the two-party system. It's both tragic and counterproductive that we can't choose from a larger pool of candidates. But, again, this is the system we have. Fixing the system is much easier if there is still a system around to fix.

John Kerry's history of indecision, poor decisions, appeasement and political expediency is unacceptable from where I stand. And his statements, votes and continual position-shifts on matters of war and peace are neither rhetoric nor opinion. They are a matter of record.

MSM Turnaround?

Even WaPo is turning around. Columnist Colbert King has had a change of heart regarding the Swiftboat Veterans. Quoting Democratic Vietnam Vet Rodney Coleman:

"Kerry still hasn't satisfied me and many others. . . . It's September and I'm still conflicted. Speaking for myself, it is NOT enough that he served!" Those aren't the thoughts of a Republican-funded, right-wing, over-the-top Swift boat veteran. Ignore them, Kerry camp, at your peril.

Senator Kerry we have some common ground-neither of us was in Cambodia.

As your running mate once said, that was the longest answer to a yes-no question ever.

The senator says this is the “wrong war, in the wrong place, at the wrong time." Makes you wonder why he voted for it.

No, not “Are you sure?" The correct zinger response to anything Kerry says is, “Is that your final answer?"

I saw a press release from my opponent’s campaign yesterday, and it looks like they used the same word processor my commander did way back in ‘72.

As you all know, the world economy has suffered since 9/11. And my policies have brought much of the world back. But a lot of credit has to be given to Senator Kerry’s wife, whose company has created over 10,000 overseas jobs.

I believe America knows where I stand on the war on terror. I yield the remainder of my time to Senator Kerry so that he can debate himself.

After Kerry states his opposition to the Patroit Act.., 'Sen. Kerry which part of the Patriot Act were you against that we used to round-up an al Queda cell in America that was planning to execute a Beslan type school attack?’

I do not care to be all things to all people. To our friends around the world, I care to be a voice for America’s interests. But we have also heard from some evil people - and I am only one thing to them: a mortal enemy.

Our coalition of [x] nations is larger then the [y] allied nations who won World War II. One nation with right on its side is stronger than a whole axis of evil.

Expanding on the “Is that your final answer" add, “or would you like to poll the audience?"

Senator, since 9-11, we have taken the battle to the terrorists and prevented them from attacking our homeland again; not one major attack since then. What is your plan, sir, to improve on this record?

Sen. Kerry says he would’ve done “everything" differently with regard to Iraq. I guess that means he would’ve lost the war."

"Sen. Kerry says the situation in Iraq is disastrous. He hasn’t been there to see for himself, but he says that Dan Rather has given him memos about it."
“You’ve spent 20 years in the Senate, and you have created or sponsored exactly zero bills that have been passed into Law. What exactly have we been paying you for?"

Bush: “Senator Kerry has changed his position on this issue so many times I had to be prepared for both of his answers."

Daily Worker^H^H^H^H^H^HKos

One thing that fascinates me about the Leftie blogs: like the Daily Worker of years past, the truth tends to disappear when it no longer matches their vision of the way the world should be. The Daily Kos is an excellent example.

At the onset of RatherGate (9/10), Kos published a well, rather, detailed treatise on how the forged memos could, in fact, be real. On 9/12, it followed up with another astonishing article whose central contention was that the documents were, in fact, real (I think... however, the tortured logic is admittedly hard to follow). From that point forward, all of the discussion on this topic... disappeared. The pathetic attempts at forgery... the wanton, desparate swipes at the Right to shore up the forgeries... all of the pandering discussion about experimental hybrid, space-age 1972 typewriters that could have existed to create the memos... well, those topics just disappeared.

Nice work, Kos! There might be a blogosphere Pulitzer in your future with work like this!

And today: the big story in the rest of the world? Kerry's comments regarding Allawi - for good or ill. Guess what, on the Kosmonaut site, those comments never happened.

And those with opinions that differ from the Kosmunist are... banished to Siberia. These persons, even reasonable and civil folks who disagree with the majority, never existed. And their comments are banished with them. Gone... without a trace.

Truth is the best weapon to use against the Left. Sites like Chronwatch and Polipundit, which lean to the Right, accept all opinions, from the Left and the Right... and, at that, even trolls. No one is banished to Siberia. Major issues of the day are always discussed, and mistakes are categorized and even owned up to.

That doesn't happen in the socialist, moonbat world of the Left. Truth is on vacation in Fantasyland. Or it was banished to Siberia.

Saturday, September 25, 2004

An Email Conversation

In the context of an email conversation, B wrote the following.

You could take 50% of the GOP and 50% of the Dems and put them in a room. Remove their labels and you could NOT tell which is which. I, however, do disagree with several of this administration's policies and therefore, in general, feel that it is bad for America and must change. So your generalization of Dems is without merit and I am offended. I have heard so much about "Kerry's voting record", but no facts.... if you do have such information, please share.

First off, I consider myself a Democrat in many ways - in fact, probably on the majority of social issues. I feel Bush has become less fiscally conservative than I think is wise; and has also brought certain faith-based aspects to the office with which I am personally uncomfortable.

But the issue I believe is one thousand times more important than any social issue is this: confronting and defeating extremist Islam. Do you doubt that Mohammad Atta would have detonated nuclear weapons in New York City if he'd had them? Do you doubt that there are other suicidal extremists who are trying -- at this moment -- to acquire small payload nuclear weapons to detonate in our major cities? In fact, their stated goal is to kill 3,000,000 Americans. I, for one, don't doubt that they are trying to make good on that promise.

And please note that my generalizations are not of "Democrats"... they are of the "Democratic leadership". Please note this exact phrasing in this post from July, in which the following Democratic Senators and Representatives met with groups affiliated with terrorists: Nancy Pelosi, Charles Rangel, John Conyers, Nick Joe Rahall, Democratic whip David Bonior, and Gregory Meeks. My article was picked up by DhimmiWatch.com because the very act of meeting with CAIR, in the opinion of many, borders on 'aiding and abetting the enemy' (see Anti-CAIR for more on CAIR's ties to terror groups). And what were they meeting about? Dismantling the Patriot Act.

Also note that almost every claim I make is backed up by 'linkage', attribution in the form of articles, press releases, or other citations. Yesterday's post, with multiple hyperlinks, outlined the Democratic leadership's efforts in the following areas:

1) Calling Iraqi ally Prime Minister Allawi essentially a liar (Investors Business Daily: "by snubbing his Thursday speech to Congress and, as soon as it ended, calling him little better than a liar") 2) Attempting to tear down our alliance with Australia (Captains Quarters: "Kerry Campaign Attempts To Destabilize Australian Partnership") 3) Meeting with groups tied to terrorists, as described above.

and many more. These statements and actions are used by our enemies.

As for John Kerry's voting record... I have many, many posts on this subject, including his statements on the floor of the Senate which do more to illustrate his egregious record throughout his entire career. Are you wondering why the DNC never brings up his Senate record? Because any inspection of it reveals that he has no business running for any public office, much less President.

This post, for example, outlines some of his more outrageous strategic mistakes during his long and refreshingly accomplishment-free career including specific statements and votes (I also have a more complete list I can send you if you're interested).

Again, just to re-emphasize: I am not tarring all Democrats with one broad brush. I am indicting the Democratic leadership, which has hijacked the true spirit of the Democratic party in the interest of greed. How else do you explain insulting our allies, meeting with groups tied to terror, undermining troop morale, and providing talking points for our enemies?

I'll close with a little Hugh Hewitt:

"Just how much damage can Kerry do to the war effort in the 40 days of self-destruction he has left? John Edwards will help make it a record certainly, using the Q word today...

So John Kerry will end his political career as he began it, attacking America's role in a just war, undermining the morale of the troops who are fighting it, and expressing contempt for the leadership of a nation struggling to be free of oppressors. It is the only mark of consistency he's displayed, but not one that many voters will admire."

John Kerry's Scorched Earth Policy

Irresponsible? Outrageous? You decide.

...[When] Iraqi prime minister Ayad Allawi spoke to a joint meeting of Congress. Sen. Kerry could not be troubled to attend, as a gesture of solidarity and respect. Instead, Kerry said in Ohio that Allawi was here simply to put the "best face on the policy." So much for an impressive speech by perhaps America's single most important ally in the war on terror, the courageous and internationally recognized leader of a nation struggling to achieve democracy against terrorist opposition.

But Kerry's rudeness paled beside the comment of his senior adviser, Joe Lockhart, to the Los Angeles Times: "The last thing you want to be seen as is a puppet of the United States, and you can almost see the hand underneath the shirt today moving the lips."

Is Kerry proud that his senior adviser's derisive comment about the leader of free Iraq will now be quoted by terrorists and by enemies of the United States, in Iraq and throughout the Middle East? Is the concept of a loyalty to American interests that transcends partisan politics now beyond the imagination of the Kerry campaign?

John Kerry has decided to pursue a scorched-earth strategy in this campaign. He is prepared to insult allies, hearten enemies, and denigrate efforts to succeed in Iraq. His behavior is deeply irresponsible--and not even in his own best interest...

An offer to vote for Kerry, if...

Michael Barone made a great point on Brit Hume’s show. He pointed out that John Kerry critcizes President Bush for not showing respect to foreign leaders. Kerry, however, shows contempt for all the world leaders that stand with America...

...If I were a foreign leader I don’t think I would be too eager to join the coalition of the "bribed" as Kerry calls them. In fact, I have even questioned whether or not Kerry could hold the current coalition if elected.

Don Hyatt of Cary, NC... made an offer to John Kerry:

John Kerry has said that in order to improve the situation in Iraq he would get more help from the Europeans. I’m guessing this means help from France and Germany, since we already have help from several other European countries. Our allies have fought and some of them have died because they believe in a free Iraq, even though Kerry belittles their contributions by insinuating that without France and Germany, we don’t really have any European help.

Letting that slide for now, I’ll make him a promise. As a Republican, a Bush supporter and one who feels democracy must prevail in Iraq at any cost, this promise doesn’t come easily but here it is:

If John Kerry receives written affirmation from German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder and French President Jacques Chirac that they will each commit 10,000 ground troops to assist with keeping the peace in Iraq once Kerry is elected in November, then he will get my vote. Success in Iraq and eliminating as many terrorists as possible is that important to me.

So far, Kerry has given me nothing but a few assertions that he would handle the situation in Iraq "better" than President Bush has. Here is a chance to prove it and to get another vote in the process.

Disgraceful, part 2

Allawi told a joint meeting of Congress on Thursday that democratic elections will take place in Iraq in January as scheduled, but Kerry disagreed.

"The United States and the Iraqis have retreated from whole areas of Iraq," Kerry told reporters outside a Columbus firehouse. "There are no-go zones in Iraq today. You can't hold an election in a no-go zone."

So the Democratic Party's candidate for President is on record as saying that January elections are impossible; or, if held, they will be illegitimate. The primary purpose of the terrorists' current terror campaign is to force the postponement or cancellation of the Iraqi elections. A secondary objective has been to secure the election of John Kerry. Through Kerry's own actions, those objectives have now become one. Kerry's message to the terrorists is: What you're doing is working. Keep it up. If I'm elected, you'll get your wish and there will be no elections in Iraq.

In all of American history, is there any parallel to Kerry's disgraceful conduct?

John Kerry's Message to the Enemy

One man's vision of the future. And it ain't pretty.

...Kerry came home from Viet Nam and with a vengeance turned on his fellow vets... In desperation, John Kerry has resurrected the same plan that gave the North Vietnamese, by their own admission, the will to fight on--to continue the killing of our soldiers and innocent civilians...

...As president, Kerry will pull the troops out of Iraq and leave that country to radical Islamists as a reward for their assistance with the hope that Iraq will be enough for them. He will do it slowly, in the first few months, then quickly, proclaiming that the United Nations now has control. The terrorists will have won and Iraq will be their playground...

...but Iraq with its oil-producing ability next to Iran and Iran’s budding nuclear program and picture both these countries under radical Islam’s control and what picture to you see? Let’s not forget about Syria, also under the strong arm of the Ba’ath Party and a harbinger of terrorists. Now, instead of sporadic terror attacks in a couple of cities in Iraq, the civilized world will be facing at the very least, a triumvirate of radical Islamic terrorist-controlled countries with nuclear weapons and billions of dollars of oil. They will, in effect, have control of the world’s economy via the oil and weapons that can obliterate any enemy that dares challenge them. Their victory will be complete--almost...

There will be the small matter of the North American Continent, target rich and full of infidels that need to be killed. For those who need to kill like a junkie needs a fix, their new playground will be California, Texas, Indiana, and Rhode Island. With fifty states to choose from, they can take their pick. Europe, already seen as weak, can wait. Europe will be dessert after an American main course.

People must understand. We must stop these killers in Iraq. If we don't, you can expect a suicide bomber in an elementary school near you. The goal of radical Islamists is not just to conquer Iraq. Their goal is to conquer the world. Never forget that.

Zarqawi's mentor gets whacked

Big news that you might not have caught in the mainstream media. Surprise, surprise.

Reader Mark Sebald draws our attention to this article from today's Washington Times: "Zarqawi's mentor said to be killed by a U.S. hit." The Times reports:

The Muslim cleric responsible for the practice of beheading hostages in Iraq - including two Americans this week - has been killed in a U.S. air strike, a newspaper and Islamic clerics said yesterday. The Muslim cleric, Sheik Abu Anas Shami, 35, was killed when a missile hit the car he was traveling in on Friday in the western Baghdad suburb of Abu Ghraib. Mr. Sebald observes:

Notice any similarities to the way Israel takes out terrorists? To me this is good news. It implies that U.S. forces are developing intelligence sources and making progress fighting the insurgents. I had thought there would be some reaction to this by now, but so far I haven't seen any.

Bush's National Guard Service: a first-person Perspective

I can say from my experience that flying operational fighter jets is highly dangerous. People don't strap fighter jets to their backside if they are overly concerned for their future. While in F-105 training at McConnell AFB in early 1968, we lost five aircraft in six weeks.

I can assure you that Lt. Bush was continuously exposed to similar dangers during all weather scrambles and during training exercises as evidenced by the F-102 pilots killed in his unit.

Cowards (or people who lack courage) don't take on the risks that Lt. Bush did in flying Fighter Interceptor Aircraft. Flying jets in wing formation in the weather and carrying explosive ordnance on board is dangerous work. The pilots in these squadrons (including Lt. Bush) did what their country asked them to do. They performed their assigned mission and did it well. In November 1970, the Commander of the Texas Air National Guard, Lt. Col. Jerry B. Killian, called Mr. Bush, then 24, "a dynamic outstanding young officer" who stood out as "a top-notch fighter interceptor pilot." "Lt. Bush's skills far exceed his contemporaries," Colonel Killian wrote: "He is a natural leader whom his contemporaries look to for leadership. Lt. Bush is also a good follower with outstanding disciplinary traits and an impeccable military bearing."

Lt. Bush entered the ANG in May 1968 and took his last (F-102) flight in the Guard four years later in April 1972. His flying tour included pilot training and than operational flying in the F-102 (111th Tactical interceptor Squadron). During Lt. Bush's time in the Guard he accumulated hundreds of hours of flying time; he served his nation honorably; he flew close to 4 years straight and performed Guard duties in 1972 and 1973 satisfactory to his Squadron Commander (Lt. Col Killian) and satisfactory to the ANG; he was given an honorable discharge in October 1973.

Like all Guard members, Lt. Bush was required to accrue a minimum of 50 points (annually) to meet Guard service requirements (a minimum of 300 points in six years). What the liberal media may not have covered in their many articles about Lt. Bush's ANG service is that Lt. Bush accumulated 954 points - exceeding the six-year Air National Guard requirement for service - threefold. Of course, everyone knows this, right? All those investigative reporters must have brought this fact out a dozen times. I just must have missed it.

The Fall

If we wonder why CBS is in trouble, why no one trusts the universities or the U.N., or why the Democrats may soon lose the Senate, the House, the presidency, and the Supreme Court, the answer has a lot to do with arrogant hypocrisy - the idea that how one lives need have nothing to do with what one professes, that idealistic rhetoric can provide psychological cover for privilege and preference, and that rules need not apply for those self-proclaimed as smarter and nicer than the rest of us. But none of us - none - get a pass simply because we claim that we are more moral, educated, or sophisticated than most.

GOP Chairman Says Dems, CBS Coordinated Bush Attack

Excellent timeline that details the exquisite timing of the Democratic National Committee's "Fortune Son" strike with the CBS 60 Minutes II debacle. You would think that forgery, apparent collusion between a network and a political party, and related skulduggery designed to influence a Presidential election would be worthy of some major news coverage, a la Watergate. Aside from Fox, it appears, you'd be wrong. And they say there is no media bias. Uhmm hmmm.

Remembering Saddam

As Iraqis emerge from the dark ages of Saddam Hussein's dictatorship, the staggering dimensions of his cruel atrocities are becoming known. One million, three hundred thousand Iraqis are still missing and believed murdered through his orders. "Remembering Saddam" is the story of nine Baghdad merchants who incurred the wrath of Saddam in 1995 for allegedly dealing in foreign currency and who were brutally punished. Unlike many others, they survived to tell their story and even discovered video of their ordeal shot by the Secret Police for Saddam's amusement. They spent a year in the infamous Abu Ghraib prison near Baghdad, and then were led into the clinic where Doctor's surgically amputated their right hands...

"We know we can’t count on the French. We know we can’t count on the Russians. We know that Iraq is a danger to the United States, and we reserve the right to take pre-emptive action whenever we feel it’s in our national interest."

- John Kerry, on CNN’s Crossfire, in 1997.

Also Heard around the Web

"While Mr. Kerry has every right to criticize U.S. conduct of the war, one would think he'd be wiser than to attack Mr. Allawi for saying it will be possible to hold the same elections that Mr. Kerry said just this Monday were his own exit strategy from Iraq. Or to accuse Iraq's Prime Minister of painting an unrealistic picture about a country the Senator has never visited. Having described the U.S. allies who liberated Iraq as a "coalition of the bribed," Mr. Kerry now insults the Iraqis he'd be working with if he becomes President."

Friday, September 24, 2004

Allawi's Iraq

From PoliPundit, excerpts of Prime Minister Allawi's speech and a powerful wrapup by Alexander McClure that unleashes a stinging (a much deserved) assault on our generation's Tokyo Rose. And why was John Kerry speaking in a Columbus firehouse while most Senators and Representatives were listening attentively and giving standing ovations to Prime Minister Allawi?

...They warned that there could be no successful handover of sovereignty by the end of June. We proved them wrong. A sovereign Iraqi government took over control two days early. They doubted whether a national conference could be staged this August. We proved them wrong. Despite intimidation and violence, over 1,400 citizens, a quarter of them women, from all regions and from every ethnic, religious and political grouping in Iraq, elected a national council. And I pledge to you today, we’ll prove them wrong again over the elections...

...The transition in Iraq from brutal dictatorship to freedom and democracy is not only an Iraqi endeavor, it is an international one. More than 30 countries are represented in Iraq with troops on the ground in harm’s way. We Iraqis are grateful for each and every one of these courageous men and women...

...When governments negotiate with terrorists, everyone in the free world suffers. When political leaders sound the siren of defeatism in the face of terrorism, it only encourages more violence. Working together, we will defeat the killers, and we will do this by refusing to bargain about our most fundamental principles...

There is nothing which should make every American’s heart beat faster than to hear a representative of the land where Western Civilization was born pledge to the nation which has saved Western Civilization, not once, but twice, in the last 60 years, that the people of his country will defend us too. The Old World has reached out its hand to the New World.

I believe that George W. Bush will be remembered for many things, but the powerful symbolism in the House Chamber and at the White House shall not soon be forgotten...

While the heir to the legacy of Lincoln, Wilson, Roosevelt, and Reagan was discussing the future triumph of democracy and freedom in the world, a sad farce was taking place in Columbus, Ohio. The most pathetic disgrace to be nominated for any national political office since the days of Richard M. Johnson, namely Senator John F. Kerry of Massachusetts, responded to Prime Minister Allawi’s speech. The content of it is pretty much what you would expect from a man who supported the victory of the Vietcong, the Communists in South America, and opposed defending the people of Kuwait from invasion. He said Allawi was lying, and inferred that President Bush “let Bin Laden escape.” He demands that the President call for an international conference.

Senator, you have faith in the “international community.” However, I have great faith that the Iraqi people will rise up on their own under a heroic leader and win this war against terror and oppression. And I have an even greater faith - that my fellow countrymen and countrywomen will spurn your brand of defeatism on November 2, 2004 and leave it in the dustbin of history with Marxism and Facism, and ultimately, terrorism.

Allawi, part II

Just how much damage can Kerry do to the war effort in the 40 days of self-destruction he has left? John Edwards will help make it a record certainly, using the Q word today...

So John Kerry will end his political career as he began it, attacking America's role in a just war, undermining the morale of the troops who are fighting it, and expressing contempt for the leadership of a nation struggling to be free of oppressors. It is the only mark of consistency he's displayed, but not one that many voters will admire.

...Now the Democrats, led by John Kerry, are undermining US troop morale, encouraging terrorists, and echoing defeatist themes from his undistinguished, consistent track record of taking the anti-freedom positions: the Soviet Union, Nicaragua, Vietnam. And now Iraq. Read on.

...if you want to be the next president, and the Prime Minister of Iraq comes to Washington to address a joint session of Congress, where should you be?

In the U.S. Capitol chamber! Not in a Columbus, Ohio firehouse!

Senator, if you win, you're going to have to work with this guy - or his successor. Kerry should have tried to get a meeting with Allawi himself, to try to make the challenger look like Bush's equal...

Major mistake number two: Even if you can't be there, you don't take a jab at Allawi.

...Instead, Kerry is essentially calling Allawi a liar, and continuing his gloom and doom rhetoric about Iraq.

The Chicago Tribune Pounds Kerry on Shape-Shifting

After his 2002 Senate vote to authorize the war, Kerry often characterized disarming Hussein as "the right decision." In May 2003, Kerry said on ABC that while he "would have preferred" more diplomacy before going to war, "I think it was the right decision to disarm Saddam Hussein. And when the president made the decision, I supported him, and I support the fact that we did disarm him."

As recently as last month, Kerry was sticking by that principle, stating that even if he had known the U.S. wouldn't find unconventional weapons in Iraq or prove close ties between Iraq and Al Qaeda, he still would have voted to authorize the war. But succeeding weeks have confronted Kerry with two harsh realities: His presidential candidacy has ebbed in public opinion polls, and Iraq has grown bloodier.

So it was bizarre, although not exactly shocking, to hear Kerry veer left during a speech on Monday: "We have traded a dictator for a chaos that has left America less secure ..." he said. "Invading Iraq has created a crisis of historic proportions, and if we do not change course, there is a prospect of a war with no end in sight."

Kerry, who knows a few things about changing course, evidently believes he and his Senate colleagues were right to give President Bush the authority to wage war, but that Bush was wrong to use the authority...

The view from Egypt

If you boil this down, the equation is simple. Acting like a rollover patsy (can you hear me, Jimmy Carter?) gets innocent people killed. This was proved by Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot and many other dictators and tyrants. But projecting strength does just the opposite. It saves lives and intimidates those who would hurt the weak.

...The attacks on Jewish cemeteries and synagogues in France, explosions in Turkey, assassinations and booby- trapped cars in Iraq, suicide bombings of buses in Bir Shiba and the massacre in a school in Beslan in North Ossetia have all rained undreamed of blessings on the Bush administration and its re-election campaign...

...US military policies also appear to be tending towards a preference for long-distance strikes aimed at destroying the infrastructure of nations branded as terrorist. There is little doubt that the US will continue its campaign to topple regimes it classifies as uncooperative in the war against terrorism and to intervene in the affairs of those nations whose economic and cultural conditions it feels have made them breeding grounds for terrorism...